About your Search

20120925
20121003
STATION
FOXNEWS 14
CNN 7
MSNBC 7
MSNBCW 7
CNNW 6
CSPAN 3
KNTV (NBC) 3
CNBC 2
WBAL (NBC) 2
LANGUAGE
English 66
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 66 (some duplicates have been removed)
at the state department, that the u.s. ambassador susan rice made on five sunday talk shows here in the united states. they're making this a big issue. does it have political legs as they say? >> well, first of all, i wouldn't be surprised the romney administration -- i mean the romney team make hay out of anything. look, they're looking for an issue. and they're the last people that we should hear from on foreign policy given all of the missteps that mitt romney has made. but look, wolf, beyond the political nature of this whole inquiry, we need to look at the fact that al qaeda leaders posted a video a day before the attack on september 10th which mr. alvarez wa ri wanted to avenge the death of one of his deputies in libya. he called upon libyans to, you know, try to provoke unrest. so look i think one of the things we should do right now is to let congress -- members of congress investigate this. they will investigate this. senator kerry along with senator has sent a letter to the administration answering very important questions that i think the american people will want to know. on the sh
to the united nations susan rice, to resign because of the comments she made on those five sunday talk shows? >> yes, wolf. i believe that this was such a failure of foreign policy message and leadership, such a misstatement of facts at the time and for her to go on all of those shows and in effect the spokesman for the world and be misinforming the american people and our allies and countries around the world, to me somebody has to pay the price for this. we have too much things go wrong and everyone forgets about it the next day. i think we have to send a clear message. on such an issue where an american ambassador was killed where by all the evidence at the time the presumption had to be it was terrorism. i can see why if they wanted to say - it was intentionally or unintly and to show the significance of that, i believe she should gn, yes. >> because there is statemt that the pokesperson, the director of public affairs for the offif director of national intelligence put out today they et w obviously arist -- a action, delibete and organized terrorist assault carried out by extres affili
moemds committee demands the resignation of u.s. ambassador susan rice, we're going to also ask him whether attorney general eric holder must go now that dozens more guns have been found and hundreds more deaths have been caused by those guns in the fast and furious debacle. the real losers in this was mexico. it's an incredible story and it gets worse and worse, mr. king is going to join me later. >>> up next, the obama care supreme court? a they are back on the court with blockbuster cases. free market capitalism is the best path to prosperity. none of this bernanke stuff, i can't stand it. we'll be right back, more to come. mike rowe here at a ford tell me fiona, who's having a big tire event? your ford dealer. who has 11 major brands to choose from? your ford dealer. who's offering a rebate? your ford dealer. who has the low price tire guarantee... affording peace of mind to anyone who might be in the market for a new set of tires? your ford dealer. i'm beginning to sense a pattern. buy four select tires, get a $60 rebate. use the ford service credit credit card, get $60 more. t
. then the explanations began to shift a little bit. susan rice the u.n. ambassador said it started as a demonstration about that video, and then involved other elements, who joined spontaneously. it's been shifting ever since. the president initially called it an act of terror. he has not done so since then but his spokesman has said since then that it is obviously self-evidently an act of terror, and now this statement from the spokesman for the director of national intelligence, who says in part, we do assess that some of those involved were linked to groups affiliated with, or sympathetic to, al qaeda. >> can i ask you, susan rice, she's under fire from peter king. of course he's a republican congressman. he's been calling for her resignation, saying she hasn't been forthcoming with the truth. so what does the white house say about that? >> they did put out a spokesman in defense of ambassador -- statement in defense of ambassador susan rice yesterday. it stems from a couple of sundays ago. she was on some of the sunday shows, including "meet the press" where she gave that explanation that this pr
that ambassador susan rice should resign because of her statement. >>> all right, we want to turn to andrea mitchell, chief foreign correspondent, and andrea how rare is it for the intelligence committee to come out and acknowledge they got it wrong initially, and is it having any effect on the response here? >> reporter: well, first of all it is very, very rare for them to make this type of admission. and politics are clearly in play. the questions are being asked, why did they get it wrong? was it because of a coverup, or was it because they were trying to avoid acknowledging mistakes this close to the election? so there is always a political consequence, and certainly's tonight, the white house is strongly defending susan rice, but she is in the cross-hairs of the political argument and that will be pursued by the republicans who have been hammering away for days saying that the administration deliberately covered up. something the white houses strongly denying. >>> all right, andrea mitchell, thank you, we want to let you know about a special broadcast in the works for monday. brian wil
that happened. then compare that to susan rice's tour on the five network shows that sunday which was five days later. have you thought about that? >> i know it's fashionable to call for susan rice's resignation. i think that's missing the target. the target is the president. the president sets the ideological tone and celts the message and for home it was politically and philosophically convenient to say it was caused by a movie trailer and it was spontaneous. to admit otherwise is to admit al qaeda is not on the run. it can carely out terrorist attacks. bill: on the time line it will tell you whether there was a considered effort to deflect or specificallien extra detective. >> the time line is less important than the bigger picture. the bigger picture is a collapsing policy in the region. that's not important simply because of november. it's important for the next four years. because this world view that's so divorced from reality events you from having an effective policy. if you can't recognize reality you can't deal with it. i almost prefer the coverup explanation would be true. because t
to resign. susan rice facing mounting criticism for statements she made following the deadly attack on the consulate in benghazi, peter king becoming the highest ranking lawmaker to call for her to step down. and congressman king making his case moments ago here on fox news channel. >> if ambassador rice was deliberately misleading the american people and showed a lack of knowledge and sophistication, she shouldn't hold that. the entire administration is wrong and this is the american people, and the world, and she was as spokeswoman, our representative to the world and explaining what happened and virtually everything she said was wrong. >> kelly: with that, we welcome you to a brand new hour of america's election headquarters, i'm kelly wright. >> i'm jamie colby, an interesting new twist to the whole story, congressman king joins a growing list of lawmakers, why ambassador rice initially declared the benghazi attack, a reaction to a protests in cairo over an anti-islam film before acknowledging it was a coordinated attack. and christopher stevens and three other americans were ki
it was a terror attack 24 hours after the incident. now some senators are demanding ambassador susan rice say why, she said it wasn't. what did the white house know and when did it know it? >>> plus, a new survey from ceos, does the pessimism spell trouble for president obama and maybe the rest of us also? president obama and mitt romney meanwhile battling it out in the swing state of ohio. john harwood joins us now with all the details. good evening, john. >> good evening, larry. you know, in the wake of that 47% video last week, mitt romney's got a new message and that's to tell middle class people as well as the poor that he cares about them. he did it on the stump in ohio today, he also did it in an interview with our nbc colleague ron allen just a few minutes ago. here's mitt romney. >> i served as a pastor of a congregation with people of all different backgrounds and economic circumstances that i care very deeply about the american people and people of different socioeconomic circumstances. and i think throughout this campaign, as well, we've talked about my record in massachusetts. don't
believe that susan rice was a good foot soldier for the administration, but to even look at the fort hood attack, we said that was work place violence and found out that was connected to al-qaeda and even at times where bomber, we said an isolated incident and found out that was planned and connected to al-qaeda. so, this is actually something that has happened before time and time again and definitely. >> kelly: and both of you-- time out ladies, let me put this question out to both of you. since mr. romney is expected to attack the president on economy, and foreign policy and so far we have not seen what he will do for a second term. so, what do you anticipate the president will have to do, jehmu, in order to get ahead of this foreign policy gap that's going on right now in the wake of the death of four great americans. i don't know, kelly, i disagree with you. we haven't seen from president obama what his next four years would be, we have not seen anything from governor romney on what his business-- his presidency would look like, all he's done is attack the-- >> during the debate. >>
rice and others, not just susan rice, who were suggesting that the consulate was as well secured as it could have been. not only the security contractors on the ground to provide security for ambassador and the building itself, but many members of it that made it sound like a big team. it appears that is not case. we learned two other things to present additional problems. we heard about the telephone intercept between al-qaeda linked groups about the attac attack. we know the phone call took place after the attack and the administration had access it to quickly after the attack. so the question is if they knew that, if they had access to that administration to zo quickly after the attack why wasn't it shared with the american people? finally we have the commander, the top general in africa who oversees this, carter hamm, told reporters in july that the united states hasn't done enough to degrade the growing threat from al-qaeda and he was saying it in july. should have been raising alarm bells in washington at the time. >> bret: juan. you know, we here at fox report a lot of thi
, do you agree it's the fog of war that led people leak jay carney and susan rice to say it's as the result of a ridiculous movie trailer? >> if this wasn't for political reasons it's out of sheer incompetence. and to cover up solyndra and fast and furious, misinformation for political purposes. so the question we have to ask is did they do this out of incompetence or are they liars? >> that's a good question, penny, even just yesterday, james clapper, the director of office of national intelligence came out and said, look, this was sort of our fault. we didn't have all the information right way way. however, witnesses on the ground, they seemed to know it was a terrorist attack and as we now know the white house internally labeled it as a terror attack and they knew there were the al-qaeda off shoots, may have been preparing stuff for september 11th. is this a failure of intelligence? >> again, let us go back. there's a lot of different informati information, and in a responsible manner and go out-- the president, i'll remind everybody, the president the day after in his st
. moments ago, four top republican senators sent a letter to u.n. ambassador susan rice seeking clarification on her very public statements that the september 11th terrorist attack in benghazi, libya, this year was the result of a, quote: spontaneous reaction. the letter writes in part, quote: in the aftermath of the september 11th terrorist attack in the benghazi that resulted in the death of four americans including ambassador chris stevens, you made several troubling statements that are inconsistent with the facts and require explanation. we look toward -- forward to a timely response. those statements involved ambassador rice appearing on several national news broadcasts in which she blamed a spontaneous protest for the murders. but as more and more information came to light, including this video of attackers at the u.s. compound with rocket-protelled grenades and clearly no protests around them, it has become clear that was not the case and the information was not accurate. senator barrasso, a republican from wyoming, yesterday said on fox news business -- fox business news
of the administration in sending susan rice to say this is a spontaneous demonstration when as you reported it was known inside the administration within a day that is was not. it was a terror attack. why did they deceive? it's obvious. the attack took place five days after the democrats spent a week in charlotte touting, spiking the football on oh sa -- spikinn osama. within a week of al qaeda sacks a u.s. embassy, kill an ambassador and the administration did not want to admit. they not they stringt out the media wouldn't care. megyn: joining me now, andy card, former white house chief of staff under former president george w. bush. your thoughts on charles's theory. >> i believe the white house must have had some intelligence work prior to 9/11 to anticipate where attacks could be on 9/11. it would have been logical for our intelligence community to want to brief the president about what intelligence work we were discovering and what had to be done to harden potential targets around the world. i also honestly believe the fault expectation at the white house should have been this was a terrorist attac
election and sending out u.n. ambassador susan rice to morning shows days after the attacks saying we do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned. by the way, you have to wonder if obama wins re-election is rice's chances of being secretary of state are collateral damage from all of this simply because senate republicans may want someone to go after if they end up losing the big enchilada. >>> critics of the voter i.d. law will take the stand today to convince the judge that the provision is unworkable. they'll hear from witnesses who say the state hasn't adequately prepared the public for what's coming. pete williams is nbc's justice correspondent. you had one court send it back to another court in pennsylvania. making this argument, look, to the state, you better prove you can make this law work. we're not saying it's unconstitution a. unconstitutional. we don't know if it will work. >> the law originally passed said you could use a driver's license or like many states, a nondriver state i.d. >> fishing license, something like t
, susan rice and her explanation when she took to the airwaves following sunday after the attack saying, well, it could be spontaneous, could be spontaneous and involved into something, a platform for those who were actually planning something. and almost sounds like they're saying the same things, right? >> right, it does, it does. this really -- that's the political nature and how the stories can become so frustrating and how you take details and try to use them from one side to the other. that's the growing frustration you see in the intelligence community and why you've seen a comprehensive statement like this one put out. we'll put this on our website too at cnn.com/security clearance. you should take two seconds to read the whole thing. it is fascinating. susan rice was over the weekend talking about how the administration still believed even on sunday, a week and a half after the attack, this was something that grew out of a spontaneous protest. there were indications in the intelligence community that wasn't the case. and so that's been a point of debate. nailing down that timel
or not this was a deliberate act, terrorist attack. this is what susan rice said at the time. >> let me tell you the best information we have at present. first of all, there's an fbi investigation that's ongoing. and we look to that investigation to give us the definitive word as to what transpyred. but putting together the best information we have available to us today, our current assessment is that what happened in benghazi in fact was initially a spontaneous reaction to what transpired hours before in cairo, almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in cairo which were prompted of course by the video. >> there was a caveat there. she said the fbi was still investigating. but the thought was it was a spontaneous reaction. a couple of days before that, the libyan president said, no, in fact, al qaeda was behind this attack. and then days later, after ambassador rice is on this program and other programs, the president's spokesman jay carney says this. it is, i think, self-evident that what happened in benghazi was a terrorist attack. well, if it was self-evident, why didn't the presid
rice to resign, does the president have confidence in susan rice? >> absolutely. >> what about the broader point here, security is so bad in benghazi, that the fbi can't even go in and investigate. what about the fact that there are talk of military options to find ambassador steven's killers? what is america doing to work its will to change the trajectory in libya? >> well obviously i'm not going to speak for the fbi. but i think the key thing here, we live in a dangerous world with threats out there. and we're going to make sure that the appropriate steps are taken to enhance security, make sure our personnel and ambassadors are secure. >> is there a military option for the united states to lead the way in libya, to track down his killers? >> i'm not going to speak to that but the president was very clear the day after this event, this tragedy, that we are going to make sure that these killers are brought to justice. >> was it inappropriate for him to go to a fundraiser the day after this attack, in retrospect knowing it was a terrorist attack? inappropriate for him to engage
: all right. government officials saying that. but on september 16th susan rice went on talk shows and had a different story, watch. >> soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in benghazi. we believe it looks like extremist elements individuals joined in testify that fort with heavy weapons, and it spun from there into something much much more violent. >> cenk: so she appears to be saying not necessarily a terrorist attack. it spun out of control. that looked questionable right from the get-go and jay carney on september 20th came out and said it is i think, self-evident up in smoke? a catastrophically embarrassing way. to lose an entire consulate, and basically be run out of town and we have learned that there were at least two dozen cia agents also in benghazi. so there was a huge loss of our intelligence out there as well. so those two things are the main reason why i think they have been trying to paper it over. and the final point, al quada. we were told that all of the fierce were overblown, and now we have people saying al-qaed
, one high-ranking republican wants u.s. ambassador to the united nations susan rice to step down. new york congressman peter king says rice is to be held account aable for her statements on the attack. here's what he told our wolf blitzer. >> i believe this was such a failure of foreign policy message and leadership. such a misstatement of the facts as known at the time and for her to go on all those showers and be misinforming the american people and our allies and countries around the world, to me, somebody has to pay the price first. we have so much things to go wrong and everyveryone forgets t it the next day. an american ambassador who was killed where by all the accumulation of evidence at the time the prezusumption had to b it was terrorism. it is definitivety terrorism, to say it was not terrorism at that time was a, to me, terrible mistake to make, whether it was intentionally or unintentionally and show the significance of that, i believe she should resign, yes. >> the white house is standing by ambassador rice. she said everything she said in that interview was cleared by i
. >> september 16. ambassador to the united nations susan rice goes on five sunday talk shows and called it spontaneous. >> this was not a preplanned, premedicated attack. >> september 17. >> simply on the basis of what ambassador rice has publicly disclosed, does the united states government regard what happened in benghazi as act of terror? >> again, i'm not going to put labels thon until we have a complete investigation. >> you don't regard it as act of terrorism? >> i don't think we know enough. i don't think we know enough. >> bret: september 18 on the "david letterman show." >> is this an act of war? are we at war now? what happened here? >> here is what happened. you had a video released by somebody who lives here, shadowy character who is extremely offensive video directed at muhammad and islam. >> making fun of the prophet muhammad. >> making fun of the prophet muhammad. so this caused great offense in much of the muslim world. but what also happened is extremists and terrorists. use this as excuse. to attack variety of the embassies including the consulate in libya. >> septembe
the movie. ambassador susan rice blaming the movie. two or three times before he said it's evident it was terrorism. >> bob: did i say it was terrorist? >> eric: you did. talk about the four dead americans. >> bob: i agree with you on that. the rest of the demonstrations are about the movie how do we know where the movie came from? i don't know the answer. >> greg: you are misinterpreting what i'm saying.e about the movie. i care that the movie caused this. that is baloney. the movie got 90% of the people never saw the movie because it was blocked. it's baloney and pretense. why do the press and the administration jump on to it? they believed it. they believe that america at fault for everything. >> bob: true about libya. how does it explain protest in ethiopia -- >> greg: they're idiots. >> eric: stay on libya. four are dead. we'll talk about them later. >> dana: also because it is the american president, secretary of state, everybody else saying loudly it's because of the video fueling the flames. doing public service announcement, it wasn't us now. how many other things will sur
that it was deliberate and organized terrorist attack. but administration officials, including ambassador susan rice seemed to go beyond that guidance, stating that benghazi was a demonstration prompted lie that youtube video that spun out of control and fox news was first to report that there was no ongoing demonstration when that attack unfolded, shep. >> shepard: catherine herridge in washington tonight. catherine, thanks very much. >> you're welcome. >> shepard: president obama spoke with the israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu today about how to deal with iran's suspected nuclear ambitions. according to the white house the two leaders shared goal of preventing iran from making atomic weapons. second phone call amid tension over the prime minister's push for the u.s. to make amore aggressive stance. governor romney spoke with the leader by phone and renewed his attacks on the president for his foreign policy. ed henry with the news live from the white house tonight. president obama is taking heat for not meeting with benjamin netanyahu face to face and today vice president biden addressed
, representative peter king is calling for the resignation of u.s. ambassador to the u.n. susan rice for what he says was misleading comments about the attacks in libya. yes, this issue has become political, but it is more than that because even if u.s. intelligence didn't know the specific details of an impending attack, here's what they and we do know. three days before the attack, senior u.s. embassy officials were warned by the libyan militia connected to the government, they couldn't secure benghazi. the british ambassador was attacked in june and of course, the attack happened on september 11th and once again, once the attack happened, u.s. intelligence knew within 24 hours that it was linked to al-qaeda. also, "the daily beast" eli lake reports they even knew the location of at least one of the attackers. eli is with me tonight on what u.s. intelligence knew in the immediate aftermath. also with us is jeff porter, an adviser on political and security risks and jeffrey cousins. great to see you. and eli, let me start with you. you have had so much of the first reporting on this and now, yo
is calling on the u.n. ambassador to the united nations, susan rice, to resign for initially calling the attack, quote, spontaneous and not premeditated. >> she could have said it's uncertain as to exactly how it was done, it's unsure how it was done. but to rule out terrorism saying it was not a terrorist, that was wrong. she misled the people, either if it was unintentionally or done out of ignorance. in either case, she would do the right thing and step down and resign. >> yesterday the spokesman for the national intelligence director issued a statement saying they, "revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out extremists." brent colburn is the national communications director for the obama campaign. brent, good saturday to you. >> thanks for having me, craig. >> "the new york times" today has a piece. the piece is called "shifting reports on libya killings may cost obama." how concerned are you at this point about the way the white house has explained the attack on the embassy? >> sure. we
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 66 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)